On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 09:21:32AM +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> tpm2_get_pcr_allocation() determines if a PCR bank is allocated by checking
> the mask in the TPML_PCR_SELECTION structure returned by the TPM for
> TPM2_Get_Capability(). One PCR bank with algorithm set to SHA1 is always
> allocated for TPM 1.x.
...
> + for (j = 0; j < pcr_selection.size_of_select; j++)
> + if (pcr_selection.pcr_select[j])
> + break;
> +
> + if (j < pcr_selection.size_of_select) {
> + chip->allocated_banks[nr_alloc_banks] = hash_alg;
> + nr_alloc_banks++;
> + }
> +
Why was this needed? Can CAP_PCRS return completely unallocated banks?
Kind of out-of-context for the rest of the changes.
Should this be a bug fix of its own because it looks like as this is a
bug fix for existing code, and not a new feature? Just asking because
I don't yet fully understand this change.
Anyway, I believe that you can streamline this by:
/* Check that at least some of the PCRs have been allocated. This is
* required because CAP_PCRS ...
*/
if (memchr_inv(pcr_selection.pcr_select, 0, pcr_selection.size_of_select))
nr_allocated_banks++;
[yeah, comment would be awesome about CAP_PCRS. Did not finish up the
comment because I don't know the answer]
In addition, it would be consistent to call the local variable also
nr_allocated_banks (not nr_alloc_banks).
/Jarkko
